Aug 14, 2015 That may be true, but it also may be people just seeing someone challenging Hillary and their reflex marks the unfavorable. The 44% with no opinion kind of put credit to that argument. It is not a weak argument. Are you denying the problem with money in politics all together than? Only then would it be a weak argument. But it depends on how much you think that even matters. It's like your now just like, f--- it, it is from wall street, doesn't matter, all that means is that she will be well equipped to destroy him later. Way to get behind everything that is wrong with politics.
Aug 14, 2015 big money in politics is absolutely a problem. I'm a lot more concerned with unlimited SuperPAC donations than individual donors who are limited in what they can give and can easily be tracked. I wish we had publicly financed elections and that fundraising was a much smaller issue. But it also isn't that. Both Bernie and Hillary are committed to overturning Citizen's United, both by nominating Supreme Court justices who would overturn the decision and by Constitutional amendment if it becomes politically possible to do so. I'm less interested in demonizing people who give to progressive Democratic candidates because of where they happen to work. Again, if one million Wal Mart employees making minimum wage each gave five bucks to Sanders, he would be listed as getting 5 million from Wal Mart the way these lists are built. New York is an expensive place to run for office. Most of the people who can afford to donate to candidates, regardless of whether they are liberal, moderate, or conservative, work on Wall Street. I have absolutely zero problem with liberals who make their money on Wall Street donating to Clinton. If Sanders wins the nomination, they will be donating to him, too. The fact that he lives in a cheap state without a major industry dominating it's economy doesn't make him more pure than Clinton. It is just useful spin for people trying to boost their candidate. The issue with money in politics is unlimited corporate donations to Super PACs. Wall Street is not supporting Clinton in that way. The issue with big money in politics are billionaire political patrons solo funding Super PACs for a single candidate. Clinton doesn't have one of those. But big money in politics is a problem. Unfortunately you need to win to fix problems. Going into the general election and staring down the barrel of 900 million in Koch money with both hands tied behind your back is suicide. If things change dramatically and Sanders ends up the nominee, he will end up raising millions from Wall Street. He isn't going to turn away the money from well-meaning progressives who work in the financial industry.
Aug 14, 2015 and again, I'm not saying anything bad about Sanders. I just think it is a bad idea to use borderline dishonest spin against the person who is almost certainly going to be the Democratic nominee for President next year. Sanders didn't run as an independent because he knew it would hurt the Democrats chances of keeping the White House. Sanders isn't attacking Hillary Clinton because he knows, better than many of his supporters, how insanely long his odds of being the nominee are, and he doesn't want to give the White House to the Republicans. I am just pointing out the reality of how fundraising works and is reported, and what the polls show at this time. Things can change. But right now, Sanders is not in a strong position to win, and the fundraising argument isn't a good one.
Aug 14, 2015 sounds like biden is goin on the road in a few weeks -- should be interesting. i like the rumor of him becoming a james polk type president one and done
Aug 14, 2015 Big news today- http://www.goiam.org/index.php/news...-union-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president in case you didn't want to check back earlier in the thread, yes, this is the union that is listed as Bernie Sanders' biggest donor
Aug 14, 2015 still don't buy him jumping in, but if he does I am glad to have a serious general election alternative in case Clinton implodes. Biden would become my second choice, O'Malley third, Sanders, Chafee, and Webb tied for holy s--- we're f----- place
Aug 14, 2015 The union is NOT happy about this move. All you have to do is read one comment. I already know your going to say Facebook is not an indicator of the union as a whole but the overwhelming majority of comments are union members very upset. In this case, it is a fair indicator. Let's see if it sticks. If it does, that's really big news for Hillary.
Aug 14, 2015 In the IAM’s internal poll of nearly 2,000 members, Clinton outpaced the entire field of 20 candidates by more than 2-1. Among Democratic members polled, the results were more dramatic, with Clinton leading her closest rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, by more than 6-1. IAM members also favored early involvement in the election campaign by more than 2-1. The poll’s results were also affirmed in a separate independent poll. I'm sure some members are mad. "The Union" is not unhappy
Aug 14, 2015 If by "The Union", you mean the 1,700 members polled out of 500,000 then yes, you have a point.
Aug 14, 2015 that's a very strong sample size for the population you're talking about. That would be like a sample size of over 900,000 to poll the entire US. Plus there was another independent poll done confirming the results. I don't think the endorsement is saying anything about Bernie's support for labor. It is just a recognition that he won't be the nominee and it is time to start organizing to beat the Republicans NOW since they're already on the attack. I am sure there are a lot of nurses who support Hillary Clinton and weren't thrilled about their union's endorsement either. But this is big news from a big union, and you can't just ignore it or pretend it doesn't mean anything.
Aug 14, 2015 Well obviously is not about Bernie's support for labor. That is clear as day. lol. But Who is doing that? Who is downplaying it? Did you miss the part where I said it was huge for Hillary? I'm just going by what I see, and what I see are a very, very large amount of upset Union members. If you find this independent poll can you link it in here somewhere and tag me? I'd like to see it. Just out of sheer curiosity.
Aug 14, 2015 most independent polling is not released for public consumption, particularly internal polling done by campaigns or labor unions. For the same reason you saw such lopsided support for Sanders on the isidewith map, you're going to see a lot of discontent online whenever any politician or union endorses Clinton. If Bernie Sanders were running for President of the Internet, he'd be elected to follow President Ron Paul in a landslide. But going by what you see online is a bad way to judge what is happening in the real world. In polling of states where union membership is high enough to have crosstabs, Clinton tends to do better with union members than Democrats as a whole. She's been a long time friend of labor, and has cultivated relationships for a long time. it isn't surprising to see this endorsement, and there is nothing nefarious or dishonest about the endorsement process.
Aug 14, 2015 My boss was just mentioned in a politico article about helping him decide Should be interesting
Aug 14, 2015 http://www.ipsos-na.com/download/pr.aspx?id=14767 if he jumps in, he has a good shot at taking second place from Sanders, but Clinton is still at 55% with him in. It would take an absolutely seismic shift for him to have a real shot at the nom, and I don't see a man his age ending his legacy with a third failed Presidential campaign
Aug 21, 2015 This kind of lays out what I've been talking about... http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/this-is-how-bernie-sanders-could-win/?ex_cid=538fb There isn't anything to suggest that Bernie has some kind of magical, inexplicable political appeal. He appeals to white liberals, does very poorly with everyone else. In states where white liberals dominate the Democratic primary electorate, he's going to do well. In states where that isn't the case, he is going to do very poorly. Unfortunately for him, Super Tuesday is more heavily Southern than in the past, which means that he has to figure out how to win in Iowa and New Hampshire, avoid getting blown out in Nevada and South Carolina, AND do the expensive work of organizing early in Southern states where he is currently getting crushed by 60+ points. His best chance to win the nomination is for Clinton to absolutely and utterly implode late enough that an establishment candidate would have a hard time jumping in to take her place. That's not a scenario that anyone should wish for.
Aug 27, 2015 Seems more and more like the Biden talk was more driven by media looking for a story than real reporting. Obviously VP has made some moves, but he just told DNC that he doubts he has the emotional fuel for a race after everything. Didn't close the door, but it I'd getting later and later to get in. I only see it if Hillary totally falls apart because no one wants to end up stuck with Bernie as the default candidate. Either way, I think the Obama White House gave Biden a little warning yesterday. Former governor Tom Vilsack, the Sec'y of Agriculture and most prominent Iowan in the White House endorsed Hillary. An early endorsement by a Cabinet member popular in a key nominating state doesnt happen without the President's knowledge and permission.
Aug 29, 2015 I actually think Biden would be a fine, if not great President, but I have this intuitive feeling that he would have a much greater chance of losing in the general than Hillary. No candidate is perfect, but my interest is in the likeliest to win, and thus solidify the Obama legacy. Throughout history, Presidencies defined as "transformative" have depended on their successors to uphold and/or expand about their achievements (i.e. FDR --> Truman; Reagan --> Bush). It is vital for a Dem to get elected next year, and that is precisely why the thought of Bernie winning the nomination terrifies me, although I am a fan and think he could be great for the country. I am definitely frustrated with the conduct of the Clinton campaign so far, as she appears stiff and out of touch at times on the trail, and arrogant and misleading in the handling of the e-mail "scandal." Short of criminal indictment or revelations about serious conflicts of interest regarding the Clinton Global Initiative, I am pretty confident the "scandal" will dwindle and her favorability will recover as the campaign heats up. If I am correct about that, winning the electoral college should be cake for her given the mathematical and demographic advantages Dem's currently have during Presidential cycles. My hope for some key appointments if she does win are: Treasury Secretary: Elizabeth Warren Labor Secretary: Bernie Sanders SCOTUS: Barack Obama (the confirmation hearings would be GOAT television).
Aug 29, 2015 lol I cannot see the Republicans who filibustered even routine business during the Obama Admin letting him through with a lifetime appointment to the Court. would make for great television, though. Treasury Secretary is about the only job I would like to see Warren in more than the Senate. I think Bernie is better suited to serving Vermont, though, than trying to handle the entire nation. He's better as an ideological counterweight in the Senate than someone actually responsible for implementing policy, even at Labor which is in his wheelehouse.
